"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

Just received mine. A very nice little book, 62 pages. Deals with the post-War career of the FT, on a continent-by-continent basis, subdivided into country-by-country, if you follow me.

Very gratifying is that Pascal begins by saying that no tank was ever called FT17. Unfortunately, on one occasion later in the book the English translation calls it the FT17! Never mind - it's only one, as far as I can see.

Have given it a quick read through, and it looks excellent. France isn't dealt with, presumably because it's covered in volume 1 and then becomes a German matter after 1940, but other countries that bought or captured FTs are (including Ethiopia, which was a surprise to me). There are 24 colour plates, and references to a number of variants (Kegresse and so on).

The only real disappointment is the absence of a section on the Afghanistan FTs and how they ended up where they did. I was hoping there would be some new info.

A number of our trusted friends are mentioned in the acknowledgements - Michel, François, and Antoine Misner, amongst others - so it is clearly an authoritative work.

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

In section about tanks Renault FT in Yugoslavian service there are many mistakes. The author used literature that was totally rejected in the Serbian historiography.

Oh dear. This is not looking good. Can you give some examples?

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

So many mistakes in the section about Chinese and Japanese FTs... All age-old rumors are being perpetuated. It seems that the author could not make out the difference between Chinese and Japanese Renault FTs at all.

Dear James, Thanks for your opinion on my book and I'm sorry for the mistake of my translator. But maybe do you know I'm the first French author who are published a book on the Renault FT under the right name in 2009, only my friend François Vauvillier talk of this before in GBM. And I explain this denomination in introduction of this volume 2 :

"To begin, we need to correct several popular misconceptions: The “FT 17” tank never existed and this designation was never applied. Neither do the initials stand for “Faible Tonnage“ (“Lightweight”) nor even worse, “Fighting Tank”. The false designation FT 17, which has been around for many years, originated in a German Tashenbuch or Identification Manual of the 1930s, in which the authors attempted to classify French tanks by attributing to each one a year of origin. There never was an FT 17, just as there never was a St Chamond 17 or an FCM 2 C 18. Our Renault was simply known as the FT, the two letters being those applied to the design in the factory list of the day. The next vehicle on this list to be produced by Billancourt would be the Renault FU truck. A year of origin would only begin to be applied to a vehicle by the French Army in the early 1930s, when they were in the process of modernizing their equipment, for example with the AMR 33 or the Renault R35."

Dear Nebojsa Djokic, for Yugoslav FT's my principal source are two books writed in 2011 and 2013 by Bojan B. Dimitrijevic a Yugoslavian historian as you see in bibliography. This author seems serious, I look on his Wikipedia files and I found his cursus : “Born in 1968 in Belgrade. He graduated in 1994 and MA in 1997 at the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade with a thesis entitled 'Yugoslav Army in the Fatherland in Valjevo region 1941-1945' also has master's degree in 1996 at Central European University in Budapest for a thesis entitled 'The Royalist Resistance and Southwest Serbia 1941-1945 '. he earned his doctorate at the University of Novi Sad in 2004 and doctoral thesis was' Yugoslav People's Army from 1945 to 1954 '. He was curator of the Museum of the Yugoslav Air Force until 1997. In the period March 2003 - April 2004 was adviser to the Minister of Defense for the reform of the army, and since 2006 the Serbian presidential adviser for military affairs. As an advisor to the Secretary of Defense directed the team that developed the Strategy of Defense of Serbia and Montenegro and the Defense White Paper. Dimitrijevic was a collaborator of the State Commission for fact-finding on the execution of the death penalty against General Dragoljub Draza Mihailovic, which concluded that the correct official version of the arrest of Dragoljub Mihailovic in which the role was played by Nikola Kalabić.”But if you have any news information’s you're welcome I’m happy to talk with you on this subject.

Dear KKFJ1 : Regarding japanese and chinese FT's some friends in Taiwan and China ( Shyuee-Chuan Lan, Chei-Wei Chang and Terence Wong who write a very big book on the subject) help me for texts and photos I have also some book in Chinese very hard to find in France. Of course I make the same answers if you have any news information’s you're welcome and I’m happy to talk with you on this subject.

That's VERY strange. Shyuee-Chuan Lan, Chei-Wei Chang and Terence Wong are all respected photo collectors and armor researchers from Taiwan and Hong Kong. Mr Chei-Wei Chang also assisted me on my research on artillery.

There is a book compiled by Shyuee-Chuan Lan and Chei-Wei Chang, but I haven't heard of any book compiled by all these three researchers. However there were people in China who made books with many mistakes on Chinese and Japanese armor, but using photos from the collection of these researchers(however AFAIK these books did not list them as authors). Did you contact any of these researchers in person or learn about their research(or what said to be their research) from other people/sources?

(There is also another possibility - Mr Shyuee-Chuan Lan himself is more a photo collector than a professional researcher. But...I don't think it is highly possible for him to make up these errorous text all by himself)

I'm absolutely in agreement about the "FT" matter. In keeping with our zero-tolerance policy, I've changed it on several Wikipedias. I'm having a bit of trouble with a Spanish gentleman at the moment. I just thought it's a pity that one "FT 17" accidentally found its way into the book. The FT-17ers love it when one gets through the net.

I think it would be an excellent idea to exchange information about the FT here. In the past we have pooled our knowledge and come to some useful conclusions.The theory about no FTs going to the USA would seem to need serious reassessment.

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

Hmm, it's a good idea to pool our knowledge about the FTs around the world here. So I will translate part of my manuscript on the history of Chinese FTs written a few years ago. Please note that it was last updated back in 2014 and after that I have literally never studied armored vehicles, so please point out if you notice any errors or ambiguous parts. Here goes the first part on the origin of Chinese Renualt FTs:

As we have all known, Chinese Renault FTs were imported by the Fengtian Clique under Marshal Chang Tso-lin(Zhang Zuolin), the Manchurian Warlord. Although the original documents on the import of Renualt FTs have not been found (and, as many documents from the Warlord Era, may be lost forever), the time and circumastances of Fengtian Clique's decision to buy Renualt FT could be point out with some degree of certainty if we refer to some memoirs by Fengtian officials.

It is not know if Fengtain Clique got any Renault FT from the White Russians when they evacuated Vladivostok in 1922, but even if they did get some Renualt FTs from the Russians it did not make up the bulk of the Fengtian tank force. The Fengtian Army suffered a humiliating defeat in the hand of Chihli Army in the First Chihli-Fengtian War in June 1922. Greatly impressed by the air and maritime prowess of Chihli Clique(who controlled more than half of China's navy and air power), Chang set out to build up his own technical arms. His request for buying technical weapons (mainly aircraft) were turned down by British authorities because of the arms embargo against China, but was surprisingly proved by the French. In 1923 twelve officers were handpicked from Fengtian Clique's elite 2th and 6th Army and sent to France to be trained as pilots, along with an officer responsible for buying armaments.

Eventually along with the aircraft, mainly Breguet light bombers and Schreck FBA 19 flying boats, a number of Renault FTs(exact number I'm still uncertain) were bought from the French Army. All these bulk of equipments were sent to Manchuria by Boixo Brothers, Co. And among the 12 officers sent by Fengtian Army, 3 of them were deemed by the Frenchmen as unsuitable to learn flying, and was provided training of the operation of the Renault FTs. Two years later in 1925 two officers, Li Jianxun and Shang Yechang, were especially chosen by Fengtian Army to be trained in tank operations, and were sent to France along with other officers sent by the air squadron.

So you can see - no Polish connection, nor was there any transaction with the Renault Company. As a result no Polish FTs nor any Renault NCs - the French Army did not have NCs at that time. If I remember clearly Mr Pascal wrote in one of his earlier volumes (perhaps the one on Renualt D1) that in 1920s the French Army were selling cheap surplus Renault FTs everywhere and even hindered the selling by Renualt company of their tanks. I think the sale of Renualt FTs to China very well illustrated this point.

My main sources: Arming the Chinese: The Western Armaments Trade in Warlord China, 1920-1928 by Anthony B. Chan and two pieces of memoirs by former Fengtian officers.

Later I shall share information on the armaments of Chinese and Japanese Renualt FTs and how to distinguish them - only if I have enough time...

P.S. On Japanese FTs and Fiat 3000s (China never had any Fiat 3000s) there were already good explanations even in 1970s and 80s works of Japanese armor expert Tomio Hara. Recent years there are a number of nice publicans in Japanese language on early Japanese tanks that should be consulted.

One examle by many. Company from Sarajevo had fight in Topola in central Serbia. German armour vehicles attack Yugoslav positions in Topola. Company with Renault FT and Renault M28 was in village near Topola. Comandant Yugoslav division with comand position in Topola order counterattack with tank company, 2 AA batery Škoda 8 cm M28A and 2 battalions of infantry. Counterattack was successful and Germans retreat. Minimum 3 Germas armour vehicle destroyed (incl one Pz II) and minimum 3 Yugoslav Reanult destroyed too. Comanding officer of Yugoslav tank company KIA. In some articles we can to read that in counterattack we had sqaud with tankets Skoda Sid but that squad had fight same day near Mladenovac (around 20 to 30 km by Topola).

Another example.Yugoslavia received the first tanks from France in 1921.She received 8 to 10 tanks from the French Detachment in Constantinople when this was disbanded.France had a law that it could not to gift weapons, and tanks were first written off as useless and then sold as old iron to Yugoslavia.

In the same way, from 1920 to 22, Yugoslavia received at least 50 aircraft (about 20 Spades VII and XIII and about 30 Breguet XIV) from France, dozens of trucks and about 200 cannons and howitzers.

The Yugoslavi tanks Renault M28 have one essential difference from similar Polish Renault's M 26/27. Yugoslav tanks have the same engine as the original tanks Renault FT and no more powerful engine. This is done to unify the engine for easier maintenance.